Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
National Prosecution Service
OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
Cagayan de Oro City

LORNA Z. RANIDO and NPS NO. _________________

ALDWIN M. GEMENTIZA,
Complainant,

- versus- FOR: ESTAFA and B.P.22

JESELINE M. GABUCAN,
Respondent.
x------------------------------------------------x

JOINT AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLAINT

WE, LORNA Z. RANIDO and ALDWIN M. GEMENTIZA, both of legal

age, married, Filipino citizen and residents of Poblacion, Binuangan, Misamis
Oriental, after being sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and say:

1. That we are filing a criminal complaint for Estafa or swindling under

section 2(d) of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code and for seventeen
(17) counts of violation of B.P. 22 against JESELINE M. GABUCAN,
hereinafter referred to as respondent GABUCAN for brevity, who is of
legal age, married, Filipino citizen and whose last known address is Zone
1, Bantiles, Bugo, Cagayan de Oro City;

2. That complainant LORNA Z. RANIDO, hereinafter referred to as

complainant RANIDO for brevity, started her business transaction with
respondent GABUCAN when the latter bought jewelries on credit from
the formers jewelry business, which purchases over the years have
totaled to about more than P300,000.00;

3. That sometime in February 2014, Respondent, who had then become one
of complainant RANIDOs valued clients in her jewelry business, pleaded
with the latter to let the former borrow money in order for her to purchase
the needed materials for her projects with certain barangays in Cagayan
de Oro City as supplier of materials and supplies;

4. That as an accommodation to Respondent for being one of the valued

clients in complainant RANIDOs jewelry business, the latter started
lending the former money with 7% interest beginning that month
onwards for which Respondent simultaneously issued and signed as
drawer and delivered to complainant RANIDO checks payable to cash as
payments thereof;
5. That from that month up to February 2015, all the checks Respondent
issued and delivered simultaneously to complainant RANIDO as
payments for her loans from her were all good and honored by their
respective drawee banks;

6. That in each of these transaction, RANIDO parted with her money

because she relied on Respondent repeated representation that each check
represented her income from her business as supplier of materials and
supplies to certain barangays in Cagayan de Oro City and for the
succeeding transactions, on the fact that the checks she issued were all
good and honored by their respective drawee banks;

7. That complainant RANIDO, by personally releasing the cash at Eastwest

Bank, Cagayan de Oro City, and after which, Respondent issued the
corresponding check and received by complainant in Cagayan de Oro
City;

8. That Respondent signed all these seventeen (17) checks as drawer,

photocopies of which are hereto attached as Annexes A to Q,
respectively, with her signature on each of these checks marked as
Annexes A-1 to Q-1, respectively;

9. That during the same period, Respondent also issued, signed and
delivered to RANIDO fourteen (14) other postdated checks payable to
cash with maturity dates starting from 23 June 2015 to 17 July 2015,
totaling P1,265,332.60 as payments for each of her subsequent loans from
her;

10. That, thereafter, RANIDO gave all the aforementioned seventeen (17)
checks to her son-in-law, herein Complainant ALDWIN GEMENTIZA,
hereinafter referred to as complainant GEMENTIZA for brevity, as
investment to their bakery businesses in Binuangan and Gingoog City,
Misamis Oriental;

11. That, however, when complainant GEMENTIZA deposited all the

aforementioned seventeen (17) checks to his own account in Banco de Oro,
Velez Branch, Cagayan de Oro City, all of them were dishonored by the
drawee bank for the reason that Respondent account is already closed as
evidenced by its rubber stamp marks to that effect on the face of each
check, which are marked hereto as Annexes A-2 to Q-2, respectively;

12. That when complainant RANIDO likewise deposited all the

aforementioned fourteen (14) checks to her own account in Eastwest Bank,
Velez branch, Cagayan de Oro City, all of them were likewise dishonored
by the drawee bank for the reason that Respondents account is already
closed;

13. That when complainant RANIDO learned about the dishonor of these
fourteen (14) checks, she immediately informed Respondent by cellphone
call and text messages about them and demanded that she pay their
principal amounts and interest thereon at 7%, to which demand she
responded by promising to deposit her payments thereof in complainant
 RANIDOs aforesaid bank account in Eastwest Bank, Velez branch,
Cagayan de Oro City;

14. That when complainant RANIDO found out that the amounts of
Respondents deposits to her aforesaid account for the payment of the
principal amounts of these fourteen (14) checks and 7% interests thereon
were very minimal, which were mostly in the amount of P3,000.00 with
one (1) deposit of P10,000.00, complainant RANIDO informed Respondent
that these deposited minimal amounts represented only the 7% interests
of the amounts of the checks;

15. That when complainant GEMETIZA informed Respondent about the

aforementioned seventeen (17) checks that were also dishonored, the latter
also made demands by text messages and by cellphone calls to
Respondent to pay the amounts of these checks;

16. That when Respondent failed to do so and even refused to see

complainant RANIDO in person nor talk to her about the payments of all
these dishonored checks, complainant RANIDO and her daughter went to
Respondents residence at Zone 1, Bantiles, Bugo, Cagayan de Oro City on
27 February 2016 after giving her a 3-day prior written notice by text
messages about such visit and attempted to see her but according to
Respondents own daughter, she is not at home. A few minutes after
informing her daughter that she is there to collect the principal amounts of
her dishonored checks, complainant RANIDO received a text message
from Respondent, informing her that all the more she will not pay her for
those dishonored checks because she allegedly embarrassed her for going
to her residence;

17. That, consequently, on complainant RANIDOs request, Atty. Raul

Manuel P. Paayas, prepared a demand letter addressed to Respondent
dated 4 March 2016 and sent it to her by LBC courier, formally informing
her about those fourteen (14) bounced checks and demanding that she pay
or arrange the payment of the full amounts of the checks and interests
thereon with him in his law office within five (5) days from receipt
thereof; otherwise, he will be constrained to file criminal cases
complainant RANIDOs behalf;

18. That on 28 March 2016, the aforesaid lawyer informed complainant

RANIDO that he received a letter from Respondents lawyer, Atty.
Perseverando L. Arana, Jr., dated 23 March 2016, acknowledging receipt
of such demand letter and alleging that she made cash deposits to her
account payments of the amounts of the checks without mentioning how
much and that she has in her possession cash deposit slips without
attaching any of them;

19. That, thereafter, on our joint request, Atty. Raul Manuel P. Paayas,
prepared another demand letter addressed to GABUCAN dated 5 April
2016 and sent it to her by LBC courier, formally informing her about the
other aforementioned seventeen (17) bounced checks and demanding that
she pay or arrange the payment of the full amounts of the checks and
interests thereon with him in his law office within five (5) days from
 receipt thereof; otherwise, he will be constrained to file criminal cases
against her in our behalf, copies of which demand letter, a receipt issued
by LBC documenting its sending on 6 April 2016 and a transaction history
issued by LBC documenting its delivery to Respondents daughter,
Norway Gabucan, on 7 April 2016, are hereto attached as Annexes R to
R-1, S and S-1, respectively;

20. That in a letter dated 11 April 2016, Respondents lawyer acknowledged

receipt of such demand letter and again requested for an accounting of her
accountability without again attaching evidence of her payments, copy of
which is hereto attached as Annex T to T-1;

21. That, thereafter, Respondents lawyer arranged for a meeting between him
and Respondent and complainant RANIDO and his lawyer in the latters
law office for the purpose of amicable settlement;

22. That after holding two (2) meetings, Respondent and complainant
RANIDO agreed that after considering all the total payments by bank
deposits of the former to the latter from 2015 to 2016, the unpaid balance
of the aforesaid fourteen (14) bounced checks is reduced to P1,090,000.00;

23. That with the assistance of their respective counsels, Respondent and
complainant RANIDO then entered into an amicable settlement only of
the aforementioned fourteen (14) bounced checks, excluding the
aforementioned seventeen (17) bounced checks, whereby Respondent
acknowledged receipt of the aforesaid demand letters sent to her dated 4
March 2016 (for the fourteen bounced checks) and 5 April 2016 (for the
seventeen bounced checks) and arranged for the weekly payment within
one (1) year from May 2016 to June 2017 of a small portion of her
accountability arising from the fourteen (14) bounced checks in the
amount of only P120,000.00 while promising to meet complainant
RANIDO again in May 2017 to propose definite terms acceptable to her
for the payment of the balance in the amount of P970,000.00, copy of
which is hereto attached as Annexes U to U-2;

24. That as to the aforesaid seventeen (17) bounced checks, Respondent

promised to meet with complainant RANIDO on 31 May 2016 in the law
office of the latters lawyer to propose the payment of their total in the
amount of P1,295,000.00, which Respondent requested to be reduced to
P850,879.60 considering that she still has an unpaid liability arising from
her jewelry purchases on credit from complainant RANIDO in the total
amount of P230,000.00;

25. That contrary to her promise, however, Respondent failed to show up on

31 may 2016 without explaining why. In fact, despite complainant
RANIDOs subsequent text messages and calls to her to inquire about
such promise and her desire to settle amicably, she failed to reply nor
communicate with her. A query by text messages from complainant
RANIDOs lawyer to Respondents lawyer on 3 June 2016 whether she is
still interested to settle amicably revealed that the latter does not know
because she has no longer communicated with him;
 26. That Respondents continuing failure up to this writing to pay or even
arrange for the payment of the full amounts of the aforesaid seventeen
(17) bounced checks to complainant RANIDO after she was both
informally and formally notified that they were dishonored for the reason
that her account with her drawee bank is already closed and after she was
given time to arrange for their payment, for which she promised to meet
her on 31 May 2016 to propose terms for amicable settlement but failed to
do so up to this writing despite follow ups from complainant RANIDO
and her lawyer, constitutes prima facie evidence of deceit;

27. That, moreover, Respondents repeated representations that each check

she issued to complainant RANIDO is a good check because it represented
her income from her business as supplier of materials and supplies to
certain barangays in Cagayan de Oro City is indicative of her fraudulent
plan to let complainant RANIDO place so much reliance on her
aforementioned assurances and past credit standing that complainant
RANIDO allowed her to borrow money from her in the bigger total
amount of P1,295,000.00 for which Respondent issued the aforementioned
seventeen (17) worthless checks;

28. That as a proximate result of her fraud and deceit in making complainant
RANIDO part with her money in the total amount of P1,295,000.00 in
exchange with those seventeen (17) worthless checks, complainant
RANIDO suffered and continues to suffer financial damages in such total
principal amount and 7% interests thereon as well as attorneys fees to her
lawyer at 10% thereof as acceptance fee. She also suffered besmirched
reputation with a previous good credit standing to her own creditor from
whom she borrowed some of such amount, sleepless nights worrying
about the legal threats of her own creditor to foreclose her properties for
the non-payment of such amount and interest thereon, wounded feelings,
and related sufferings for which Respondent should be made to pay moral
damages to her;

29. That we are executing this Affidavit freely, voluntarily and intelligently in
order to attest to the truth of the foregoing facts for the purpose of filing a
criminal complaint for estafa or swindling under section 2(d) of Article
315 of the Revised Penal Code and for seventeen (17) counts of violation of
B.P. 22 against JESELINE M. GABUCAN with the aforementioned claims
for actual and moral damages;

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, We have hereunto affixed our signatures this 7th

day of April 2017 at Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines.

__________________________ ______________________________
LORNA Z. RANIDO ALDWIN M. GEMENTIZA
Affiant Affiant
 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this ___th day of ______ 2017
at Cagayan de Oro City, LORNA Z. RANIDO and ALDWIN M. GEMENTIZA
with COMELEC I.D. with precinct no. 0006A and COMELEC I.D. with precinct
no. 0005B, respectively, personally appeared to me on the basis of competent
proof of identity to be the same persons who executed the Joint Counter
Affidavit and acknowledged to me that the same is their voluntary free act and
deed.